tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post5030275729878428190..comments2018-02-21T17:41:02.809-05:00Comments on Rants Within the Undead God: Islam and the Secret of MonotheismBenjamin Cainhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comBlogger27125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-75408711581256512932017-01-06T21:54:51.129-05:002017-01-06T21:54:51.129-05:00&quot;How can savagery still exist when there are ...&quot;How can savagery still exist when there are neighboring superhuman displays of rationality (in the cases of scientific advances in technology, etc)?&quot; You mean the ones destroying the environment? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-62548974561720036062017-01-04T18:17:35.647-05:002017-01-04T18:17:35.647-05:00What are the upsides to having a society which pun...What are the upsides to having a society which punishes thieves by cutting off their arms? I doubt it&#39;s even possible to &quot;thoughtfully consider&quot; the merits of cutting a thief&#39;s arm off. The practice is so primitively superstitious that it doesn&#39;t merit more than the aesthetic, gut-level reaction, namely disgust. Why cut off the thief&#39;s arm rather than his foot or his ear? Because he stole with his arm, so the arm is the most guilty part of his body? That&#39;s just savage, guilt-by-association, magical thinking, which doesn&#39;t rise to the level of a rational discussion (after the Scientific Revolution, of course, which revolutionized our understanding of reason). <br /><br />I don&#39;t think the gut-level reaction stems from liberalism exactly. For me, it&#39;s a question of anachronism. How can savagery still exist when there are neighboring superhuman displays of rationality (in the cases of scientific advances in technology, etc)? Of course, the answer is that modern societies, including the US, can be quite savage themselves, socially speaking. Thus, after WWII the US overthrew progressive (&quot;socialist&quot; or nationalistic) leaders in the Middle East, ensuring that brutal dictators reigned there instead. By way of a backlash against that Western interference, some societies in that region turned to fundamentalist Islam, which outlaws Western advances. So we understand historically how it happened, but that doesn&#39;t preclude the fact that the juxtaposition of backwards social backwards with more reality-based ones is grotesque. It&#39;s the absurd anachronism of Shariah law that offends good taste.Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-83919710627843120292016-12-31T18:22:20.086-05:002016-12-31T18:22:20.086-05:00&quot;A Muslim won’t even shrink from the coldbloo...&quot;A Muslim won’t even shrink from the coldbloodedness and obsoleteness of many of these laws, such as the law that a thief should have his arm amputated. If we draw back in horror from such laws, we merely betray our pride in our independent judgment which of course is folly compared to Allah’s.&quot;<br /><br />The phrase &quot;independent judgment&quot; implies thoughtful consideration of a matter (downsides and benefits, practicality, ect.) , not an emotional gut-response stemming from cultural brainwashing into a one hundred year ideological mutation of liberalismSheikh Donald Trumpnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-91507563164891979382015-04-19T11:01:14.110-04:002015-04-19T11:01:14.110-04:00Anon, I suspect you’re an internet troll who’s onl...Anon, I suspect you’re an internet troll who’s only pretending to be an offended Muslim. But if on the off-chance you’re an actual Muslim who believes what’s written in your comment, I would reply as follows. My website isn’t the cause of any hatred of Islam. To the extent that most non-Muslims are disgusted with that religion, it’s because of the range of subhuman Islamic behaviours themselves, ranging from the boilerplate of your ludicrous comment to the savagery of the Islamist terrorists and tribal warriors. <br /><br />So to the extent that my article is critical of Islam, you’ve committed the fallacy of blaming the messenger. But actually this article is about how problems with monotheism in general are on display in Islam. It’s monotheism that entails Mainlander’s psychology of God, and I see hints of that in core Islamic practices. <br /><br />As for your asinine remarks, it’s astonishing that you would think critics of Islam are “lower than animals,” when you’d be the one worshipping a deity that tortures people for eternity in hellfire merely for insulting that deity. Why is monotheism--rather than skepticism about Islam--that which is plainly subhuman? I’m so glad you asked. It’s because the worship of alpha males is found throughout the animal kingdom in social dominance hierarchies. When an omega wolf tries to eat before the alpha leader or otherwise disrespects his superior, that lower-class wolf is brutally beaten down. Your tribal religion obviously replays that sort of primitive social dynamic. <br /><br />Skeptics, meanwhile, display the distinctly human traits of using reason to understand what’s going on and of exercising their freedom to create higher ways of life (as opposed to worshipping sociopathic alpha males, like the multitudes of humdrum monotheists). So sorry to inform you, but the subhumanity is entirely on your side of the fence. You would be the one who worships a petulant baby of a god who is offended by the “sin” of insulting him. You would be the animal wearing human clothes who adds an alpha male in the sky to the human alphas of your prophets, imams, and caliphs. You would be the one who’s jealous of the material success of modern societies and embarrassed by the failures of basket-case Muslim ones, which would be why you won’t stand even for mere verbal criticism of your religion—because that criticism would remind you of what’s plain: your religion needs a modern overhaul just as Christianity did, and it’s that overhaul that took Europe out of its dark age. But once Islam is modernized it will become just another such compromised husk of a religion.<br /><br />You speak of “evidence” that insulting Islam leads to hell and then you quote an irrelevant passage from the ranting of a madman. Note that I’m not opposed to religious madness, since ecstasy can lead to sublime artwork. Madness has its aesthetic merit. But again, where’s your artistically worthwhile madness? Where’s your creativity? Like most Muslims, you merely submit and thus degrade yourself, because you’re anxious about your potential for existential freedom. You repeat grossly anachronistic balderdash in your hackneyed warnings on Allah’s behalf. So clichéd, so boring are your hostile remarks. You couldn’t show admirable originality even while firing off a comment in righteous anger, whereas artists use their emotions to inspire them in their creative endeavours. <br /><br />By the way, for more on Islam see my more recent article, “Clash of Worldviews: Islamist Terrorism Edition”:<br /><br />http://rantswithintheundeadgod.blogspot.ca/2015/02/clash-of-worldviews-islamist-terrorism.htmlBenjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-70821376353163852222015-04-18T09:51:41.582-04:002015-04-18T09:51:41.582-04:00Whoever insults Islam, Allah and his prophets like...Whoever insults Islam, Allah and his prophets like putting up websites that spreads hatred on Islam or making STUPID insensitive comments WILL enter the HELLFIRE unless they repent sincerely and do not repeat the same sin again. I just want to be frank. When brainless people insults Islam, it simply means that you guys hate that the truth of Islam is spreading far and wide and you people just stoop to the level lower than that of an animal.<br /><br />This is the evidence that insulting the religion of Islam will basically lead you to the Hell-Fire.<br />إِنَّمَا جَزَآءُ الَّذِينَ يُحَارِبُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِى الاٌّرْضِ فَسَاداً أَن يُقَتَّلُواْ أَوْ يُصَلَّبُواْ أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُم مِّنْ خِلَـفٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْاْ مِنَ الاٌّرْضِ<br />“The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land.”Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-76541317148855480482013-11-25T19:21:29.595-05:002013-11-25T19:21:29.595-05:00I think we might be assuming different senses of &...I think we might be assuming different senses of &quot;functional.&quot; You seem to be thinking of a function that works well; that is, you&#39;re assuming the distinction between function and malfunction. But the kind of functionality I see in Islam has more to do with the idea of following a rigorous plan, regardless of whether the plan is worthwhile or even remotely sane. So I have in mind the comparison of Islamic law with the algorithm, but I&#39;m setting aside the question of whether the laws&#39; endpoint is good. <br /><br />Anyway, a defender of Islam would say the basket-case Muslim countries aren&#39;t really Islamic or that the laws weren&#39;t meant to deal with modern (especially American) interventions. Moreover, I was thinking more of individual Muslims, although I&#39;m sure you&#39;re right that the laws were meant to ensure a well-functioning society too. Muslims and modernists will disagree about what counts as that sort of society.Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-68472239650462630672013-11-25T13:24:07.193-05:002013-11-25T13:24:07.193-05:00I&#39;m not even certain that Islam&#39;s function...I&#39;m not even certain that Islam&#39;s functionality is a given. How &quot;successful&quot; are Islamic states today, espcially those states that lack major oil revenue? Brian Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-12536465103071542362013-11-25T11:06:36.089-05:002013-11-25T11:06:36.089-05:00Thanks for your comment. The problem is there&#39;...Thanks for your comment. The problem is there&#39;s no such thing as Christianity or Islam. There are only the sects and then also the split between theism for the elites and for the masses. The masses personalize God and the religious practices make no sense unless you assume God is personal. If God is impersonal, the religions become pseudosciences. In practice, only the Catholics take the Trinity seriously, and that&#39;s because the concept of the Trinity was worked out in the heat of internecine conflict between the early Christian sects. The concept of the Trinity is what engineers call a kludge, a messy compromise that makes no sense but it worked in this case by ending the conflict. Catholics take this especially seriously because of their idea of the Holy Spirit working through Church history. This notion that God is concerned mainly with human beings or with a special group of humans implies that God is personal.<br /><br />Indeed, neither Jews nor Muslims like anthropomorphic conceptions of God. I&#39;m talking here about an implicit, underlying esoteric meaning of Islam and of monotheism, that meaning being cosmicism and Mainlander&#39;s horrible theology. Islamic practices (submission to God, trust in heavenly destination of the soul as a reward, prophet of God revealing God&#39;s plan) entail that God is personal, and the personalization of God leads to Mainlander&#39;s psychology of God.<br /><br />I agree with your naturalistic conception of time. But even if God is timeless, the will of God, which is God&#39;s immanent presence in the universe, is temporal, since it works through human history. Indeed, the will of God is supposedly expressed precisely in the history of certain chosen tribes. So just as a story must have a beginning, a middle, and an end, God&#39;s interaction with us would have that same temporal structure. This is why monotheistic religions are so concerned with eschatology. Again, I see Mainlanderian implications of the apocalyptic end time. It doesn&#39;t matter so much what monotheists explicitly say, since here I&#39;m reading a dark esoteric meaning into their theologies.<br /><br />I grant you the point, though, that Mainlander&#39;s theology makes no sense if you assume the mystic&#39;s impersonal concept of God. I see Mainlander&#39;s psychology of God as a reductio ad absurdum argument working on exoteric monotheism, according to which God can indeed be understood as personal and thus as having some peudo-temporal aspect. Once you think God is personal, you&#39;re stuck with Mainlander and thus with a very subversive worldview.Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-73255280160341723382013-11-25T03:38:07.513-05:002013-11-25T03:38:07.513-05:00Fairly good article though i think some of your pr...Fairly good article though i think some of your presuppositions are flawed.<br /><br />Mainly two:<br />1) The conception that monotheistic religions assume a truly personal god.<br /> :Both Christianity and Islam explicitly posit a Trans-personal deity (Christianity in its conception of the trinity and Islam it its explicit aversion to anthropomorphising Allah. Assuming that a Trans-personal deity has the same psychological construction as a human is the same as assuming that they posses limbs, fingers, toes, and a neurologically based brain. In this context God could no more go insane as he could break his arm. <br /><br />2) The assumption that the perception of Linear Time is valid and that that perception is assumed by monotheistic religions. <br /><br />In the Abrahamic faiths God is explicitly Atemporal. And scientifically the notion of linear time is linked with the progression of Entropy, essentially this means that our frame of perception is inherently tied to the progression of natural destruction. Ironically this could be seen as a endorsement for the &quot;Zen&quot; state of religious detachment, that unless one removes themselves from the local athro-centric frame of reference all one can see is destruction and death. If for example the universe is viewed extra-deminsionally/temporaly it appears as a finite and stable expression of an infinite mutli-verse that may not be alone. Evan Hillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11230237041504231019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-77178198225658944422013-10-09T11:05:14.711-04:002013-10-09T11:05:14.711-04:00I think you&#39;re leaving out part of Nietzsche&#...I think you&#39;re leaving out part of Nietzsche&#39;s take on monotheism. Nietzsche condemned that sort of religion as poison, as something that sickens its practitioners, and as something founded on resentment against strong-willed people. This kind of religion is a weapon used by the opposite of manly men, by devious, back-stabbing, unheroic weaklings (roughly speaking, omegas) who wouldn&#39;t win against alphas in a fair fight and so they resort to rhetoric and lies about the afterlife. What really pissed off Nietzsche is monotheism&#39;s devaluation of nature compared to some transcendent, supernatural reality. Nietzsche preferred that we work on the virtues needed to live heroically in nature, which requires that we accept and creatively overcome harsh truths, including atheism.Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-4817041519337929762013-10-08T19:44:41.155-04:002013-10-08T19:44:41.155-04:00Yes, people respect power on a visceral level, so ...Yes, people respect power on a visceral level, so daily practice helps keep the rank and file obedient to the ideal. It&#39;s a pragmatic approach that works.<br /><br />Nietzsche saw mass religions as a lower sort of morality, less sophisticated, based heavily on displays of dominance and appeals to fear.(Hence a &quot;slave morality&quot;)<br />But he also understood their functional utility and even their necessity.<br /><br />He acknowledges that the normal religions fit the needs of normal people.<br />People who need something more are the odd ones by definition, vastly in the minority.<br /><br />So someone gravitating towards a higher system of values, one not based on simplistic absolute rules, visceral appeals to dominance and fear stands outside the game but can still appreciate its workings.<br /><br />Literalist monotheists appeal to the needs of normal people who just want to feel comfortable and secure in an uncertain world and have some simple rules set in stone that tell them what&#39;s true and what&#39;s not, what&#39;s right and what&#39;s wrong.<br />People who want something more go elsewhere.<br /><br />Wow! I wasn&#39;t sure if anyone read the &#39;Heretic&#39; blog anymore let alone looked at the map of ideas!<br />In retrospect I think the map probably just confused people even more...to the extent they looked at it.<br />I&#39;m amazed and glad that you got some value from it.<br />It does give a bigger picture of my philosophical world without having to read through 100s of articles I&#39;ve written over the last 5-6 years.<br /><br />I formulated a lot of my ideas on the &#39;Heretic&#39; blog, but dialogues with myself didn&#39;t prove to be digestible to other people.<br />Nevertheless, the ideas I arrived at have seeped into all my other writings in forms more tailored to the needs of others.John the Peregrinehttp://kingdomofintroversion.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-68955092254384967812013-09-28T09:24:06.784-04:002013-09-28T09:24:06.784-04:00I think Muslims speak of the matching of their ide...I think Muslims speak of the matching of their ideals and daily practice in terms of a submission to God. So it&#39;s not a unity as much as it&#39;s an extension of the idea of a power hierarchy. God&#39;s the transcendent alpha male. <br /><br />I take a Nietzschean as opposed to a pragmatic perspective on myths. I look at myths not just in terms of their utility, since I&#39;m interested in their aesthetic value, and I distinguish between esoteric and exoteric interpretations of myths (or of any artwork, myths being nothing but fictions). This amounts to the distinction between aesthetic evaluations deriving from those with good or with bad taste in art. So fundamentalists who interpret their myths as literal truths have horrible, Philistine taste, because they unconsciously adopt the modern, science-centered viewpoint, reading fictions as if they were quasi-scientific theories. <br /><br />The best way to deal with art is to be original, to create the values that determine your interpretation, based on your life experience, your character, your artistic vision, and so forth. In this regard, literalistic (exoteric) monotheists are currently just hacks, although some centuries ago it was indeed original to think of myths as mere theories of the facts as opposed to having mythopoeic functions.<br /><br />In any case, I think we might agree that it&#39;s amusing to stand outside of the game and to speculate on what&#39;s really going on.<br /><br />By the way, I like your blog&#39;s literal map of your ideas.Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-55023697169561880422013-09-28T00:20:05.911-04:002013-09-28T00:20:05.911-04:00I have made my some of my own observations concern...I have made my <a href="http://hereticsway.gluontheferengi.com/2012/05/03/daily-life-and-higher-ideas/" rel="nofollow">some of my own observations</a> concerning faiths like Islam.<br /><br />I don&#39;t look to orthodox monotheism for creeds that are worth following or internal consistency.<br /><br />I&#39;m mostly interested in their use as social tools that make one society competitive over another.<br /><br />I admire how Islam understands that daily habits have to match professed ideal, a pragmatic reality Christians have forgotten.<br /><br />From this perspective, I watch the growth of religions such as Mormonism with great interest.John the Peregrinehttp://kingdomofintroversion.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-84822609475955103922013-05-22T09:20:45.616-04:002013-05-22T09:20:45.616-04:00Well, I too was struck not just by how well Anon&#...Well, I too was struck not just by how well Anon&#39;s description of Allah fit my infant and dictator analogies, but also by how Anon somehow manages not to appreciate that fact. I don&#39;t think he quite understands the point I&#39;m trying to make about Islam. The more terrible Allah is, the more he seems worthy of worship to the Mulsim, because that which is most terrifying is that which we understand the least. So God&#39;s alienness is a sign of his really being God. This is just the mystic&#39;s point that God is transcendent and not any immanent, created thing, of course. But instead of going with the mystic and refusing to take any literal description of God seriously, the Muslim is stuck with the Koran, which leans on some metaphors more than others.<br /><br />Anyway, my point stands that once we choose to personify the transcendent, the most plausible psychological profile of God is the dark one that runs quite contrary to the politically correct view of God as loving and just. At least Muslims take the dark view to heart, even if they don&#39;t appreciate the implications.Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-63833653647674265222013-05-21T17:27:43.834-04:002013-05-21T17:27:43.834-04:00What a monstrous being this Allah is. Why should ...What a monstrous being this Allah is. Why should we pay it any mind at all, because it is so utterly inhuman, so without compassion, so utterly incomprehensible? Even if your beleifs are true and Allah is as you describe Him, rejection and disgust are the only possible emotions we as flawed, limited human beings can have. What difference does it make, as Allah may just decide on a childish whim to destroy us all. <br /><br />Benjamin: This follower of Allah illsutrates perfectly your original point. What a chilling religion, the ultimate religion, actually. Brian Mnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-1438922709619908772013-05-18T21:31:59.400-04:002013-05-18T21:31:59.400-04:00You are wrong, He is much much worse than that as ...You are wrong, He is much much worse than that as He resembles none of His creations, but he is also 98 other things. Maybe its like stockholm syndrome. Sadist or not, we fear Him enough to worship Him at least 5 times every day.. He can do whatever He wants. He doesnt destroy souls in the fire, but he recreates you as Adam was. 33 Feet tall with skin 3 inches thick like the nephelim skeletons That were supposed found... lol. Anyways, as your flesh burns off He causes new flesh to be made upon you. (we now know that pain nerves are in the skin) He is also mercyfull as he has the mercy to send Muhammad as a final warner to us all. He is just as brutal as he is in the old testament and torah. He is the same God.Like I said too, how do you know he hasnt destroyed zillions of universes before this? Allah only knows...The word dictator doesnt even come close man...lol. That is why we fear nothing on this planet and embrace death the way you embrace life. Why would someone want to follow this debasing religion? READ THE QUR&#39;AN...You will realize it was not written by any man. Look into the scientific miricles that we are still finding in it. They say there is at least one scientific miracle n every chapter. For more information on these check out http://www.thekeytoislam.com/ it is a great handbook to understanding the Qur&#39;an explaining how the book that 1 in 5 humans on planet earth have accepted as truth from the Lord thy God Allahu Subhannah Wa Ta ala.<br />Let me know if you have any more questions. I am not an apologist nor will I smear the truth like so many &quot;moderate &quot; Muslims do today. The Qur&#39;an teaches us that next to comiting shirk (ascribing partners to Allah) lying is the worst sin imaginable in His eyes. &quot;When a man lies, he murderes a part of the world.&quot; (Cliff Burton from Metallica) Someone I used to admire from my infidel days....Anyways, thatnks for the reply and feel free to ask any more questions. Asalaam alaikum Sister. May Allah guide you to the straight path and save your soul....Ameen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-72402767809013605722013-05-18T10:37:53.110-04:002013-05-18T10:37:53.110-04:00Thanks for your comments. I must say that the baby...Thanks for your comments. I must say that the baby and dictator metaphors strike me as ideal ways of understanding the sort of character you describe in your first paragraph. You say that Allah sends everyone but martyrs into hell, where martyrs are those who are killed for being a Muslim. You emphasize that we should fear nothing in the created world, since all our fear should be felt for Allah the Creator. You say hellfire is fueled by our souls and that Allah has created most of us for the sole purpose of fueling hellfire. <br /><br />If hell is a place where souls are tortured eternally, then Allah is obviously best pictured as a sadistic, misanthropic, petty demon. Sorry, but there&#39;s just no way around it. And that&#39;s where the baby and dictator metaphors come in. Allah would be both like a self-consumed, irrational, whining infant and like a power-corrupted, sadistic, sociopathic, monstrous dictator. That&#39;s just a fact. There&#39;s no better analogy to go along with your own description of Allah&#39;s alleged deeds. Now, you can say that Allah is beyond our ability to understand with metaphors, but then you&#39;d have to live with that mystical perspective and stop cherry-picking intuitions and analogies as they suit you. For example, it would make no sense to say that Allah says anything at all, since Allah would have no mouth. Allah would be a force, not a person, and so mystical Muslims would effectively be atheists, just like the Jews who don&#39;t take seriously any metaphorical comparisons with God.<br /><br />If hell is a place where souls are destroyed rather than tortured, Allah wouldn&#39;t be sadistic but neither would he be our loving parent. Allah would be like an artist who creates many artworks and discards them at will. We don&#39;t fear artists, though. Instead, we respect their creative genius but we pity them for their restlessness. Think of a poor, starving artist who must churn out artworks at all hours of the day just for bread and water. The artist can never rest to enjoy his works. That&#39;s why Allah wouldn&#39;t keep us around, because he&#39;d have to shift his attention to his next art project. He&#39;d be like a restless, starving artist, a most pathetic figure. For Allah to be worthy of our fear, he&#39;d have to be like a monstrous dictator in the way I&#39;ve explained. Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-30671313942508135142013-05-17T17:17:40.296-04:002013-05-17T17:17:40.296-04:00PS, I forgot to mention...I dont want anyone to ge...PS, I forgot to mention...I dont want anyone to get the wrong idea that we pray for death all day long, as we can still be accepted by Allahs Raheem or mercy however slim the chances.Muhammad pbuh himself said even he didnt know what is to become of himself...Allah only knows. So if the Prophet will be afraid for his own soul, where does that leave us normal people who are constant sinners? He sent Muhammad pbuh as a mercy for all mankind to warn us about Allahs wrath and at the end of the day it is not Him who is puishing you by throwing you into the fire but it is yourself by doing bad deeds. (like the aforementioned misguided terrorists who blowthemselves up, or those vermin who carried out the boston bombings recently) but even aithiests blowthemselves up like in the Vietnam war they had &quot;sappers&quot; and Japan had &quot;kamikazies&quot; There is a scale called meezan or the scale of deeds. If your bad deeds outwiegh the good, then you go to hell. The problem is that some deeds are worth more than others, so you do not really know if you are one of the chosen ones or not. Which I believe is a good thing because if we knew we were guaranteed Paradise like the Jews believe we would just do whatever we wanted to. It keeps us from evil and therefore believe in the golden rule. as well as that if you dont want for your fellow man what you want for yourself, then you arent a Muslim.<br />Salaam alaikumAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-82619745980018258082013-05-17T16:45:25.038-04:002013-05-17T16:45:25.038-04:00There is alot to think about here if you are an ai...There is alot to think about here if you are an aithiest...As a Muslim convert I can say that a thief just gets his HANDS chopped off and not his whole arm lol. God is also not a baby or dictator, He is God. In Islam, you should know that we are the only religion that doesnt say, &quot;if you follow us, you will be guaranteed Paradise&quot;. We say that if you follow us, we guarantee you WILL GO TO HELL as nowhere in the Quran does it say that you will go anywhere but hell unless you die as a martyr. Or if Allah deems you worthy. For Allah throws into the fire whom He wills and without Allah, then protect yourself from the fire. After all, who can save you from the wrath of Allah except Allah? That is why we start every prayer with the words Aooza billahi mina Shaytan a rajeem. (I seek refuge with Allah from Shaytan the accursed. Satan is one of Allahs creations just as is the hellfire and therefore the way he punishes you is the fire, whos fuel is men and stones. Without the men, there would be no fuel for the fire and hence no punishment. So Allah has created most of us for the soul purpose of throwing into the fire for fuel. So we pray every day to die a martyr. That said, if you blow yourself up as so many misguided Muslims do, you also go to hell. So, you must be murdered, (the only crime being commited is being a Muslim) to be a martyr, thereby going to Heaven. For believing women it is very easy to get there however, you just have to do 4 things. 1, pray 5 times a day, 2.fast the month of Ramadan, 3. obey your husband and 4. guard your chastity.(it is ok if you are raped, as long as you fight back) We Muslims also never said that God is benevolent. In fact we are taught to fear Him so much that nothing on this planet scares us. ie, we do not fear the creation, but FEAR the CREATOR.Your questions of why would God only do this whole thing once is one I have asked and it can easily be answered by saying yes, it is possible that there is a &quot;multiverse&quot; or even aliens if you will, all with their own Qur&#39;an and Kabaa etc... anything is possible with Allah.This is getting a little long winded for me as I am not paying attention to grammar or punctuation as I meant this a a quick note.I will end by quoting Allah as He describes the end(oh yeah, that reminds me, who says he hasnt done this before and made and destroyed infinite ammounts of universes before us?) Everything and anything is possible with Allah...The only thing we fear is Allah and here is a taste of why...<br /><br />Allah says...<br />When the sun is overthrown.<br />When the stars fall.<br />When the mountains vanish.<br />When the camels big with young abandoned.<br />When the wild beasts are herded together.<br />When the seas rise.<br />When the souls are sorted.<br />When the female infant who was buried alive asks for what crime she was killed.<br />When the books are opened.<br />When the sky is ripped away.<br />Then, every soul shall know what it has done.<br /><br />Salaam alaikum and may Allah have mercy on us all Ameen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-35590798836968596532013-05-02T09:42:19.123-04:002013-05-02T09:42:19.123-04:00I&#39;m sure my summary here of the principles of ...I&#39;m sure my summary here of the principles of Islam is superficial. I know much less about Islam than I do about Christianity. I&#39;m absolutely certain there&#39;s more to Islam than the basics that I summarize, but the question is whether the limits of my summary make for a misrepresentation of the religion. Just because I haven&#39;t considered all interpretations of the religion is neither here nor there, since theological or otherwise poetic language admits of infinite interpretations.<br /><br />I&#39;d be interested in reading a criticism of this article, but be sure not to lump this article in with the standard New Atheistic works. Although I am an atheist, I argue here only that Islam is suspiciously consistent with what I call the esoteric meaning of monotheism, given by the German philosopher Philipp Mainlander. So I&#39;m not arguing here that Islam is false. Instead, I&#39;m analyzing monotheism and finding that the popular, comforting notions about God&#39;s character are psychologically dubious. See here for the more plausible interpretation of the monotheistic God:<br /><br />http://rantswithintheundeadgod.blogspot.com/2012/09/divine-creation-as-gods-self-destruction.html<br /><br />I will check out some of those lectures and debates. Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-44908174405285184422013-05-02T00:26:49.641-04:002013-05-02T00:26:49.641-04:00Such superficial arguments about Islam. Many logic...Such superficial arguments about Islam. Many logical fallacies here. Also many things from Christian theology mixed and labelled as Islamic theology. But you sure are a good writer. I would like to write a refutation when I get the chance. I hope you check out lectures and debates by Hamza Tzortzis. Also the website: OneReason.orgAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-14824281835685552642013-02-08T11:32:33.430-05:002013-02-08T11:32:33.430-05:00Yes, I think this is ultimately why the appearance...Yes, I think this is ultimately why the appearance of evil in the world is so problematic for the monotheist. If there&#39;s only one god to choose from, as you naturalize most forces and downgrade them at best to idols, that one remaining God needs to be perfect to be worthy of worship. But evil, sin, our freewill, etc are evidence that God&#39;s not perfect, that he&#39;s not all-powerful or that his plan is wonky. It&#39;s not just theism but monotheism that generates this conflict. If there are multiple gods, you can have conflict between them and that can explain the world&#39;s lack of perfection. Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-28003532630780955362013-02-08T06:29:37.068-05:002013-02-08T06:29:37.068-05:00I always think of various creatures in social grou...I always think of various creatures in social groups, particularly monkeys, who kowtow to the alpha male of the group. With the expansion of our intellect, so too does the powers of the alpha male need to be expansive, on order to be <i>worthy</i> of kowtowing to.<br /><br />I mean, would they pray to a god they thought unworthy of their prayer?<br /><br />So their god has to be defined by what they think is worthy of them.Callan S.https://www.blogger.com/profile/15373053356095440571noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-10627828245957875432013-02-07T19:29:38.938-05:002013-02-07T19:29:38.938-05:00Thanks. I think this essay&#39;s only the warmup, ...Thanks. I think this essay&#39;s only the warmup, though. The one I&#39;m planning to write in a couple of weeks, pulling together Gnosticism, Satanism, and libertarianism is going to be a real doozie. The question is to what extent Satan is an existential hero. If Satan&#39;s been literally demonized, given monotheism&#39;s dark secret, which the Gnostics were onto long ago, what does that say about mainstream monotheistic religions? Whose side are those theists really on?Benjamin Cainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00661999592897690031noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6320802302155582419.post-79930937235498438802013-02-07T14:01:14.067-05:002013-02-07T14:01:14.067-05:00More of an &quot;agnostic&quot; or atheist in iden...More of an &quot;agnostic&quot; or atheist in identification, but the accusation by many theists that &quot;atheists hate God&quot; would definitely apply to me. I confess to the sin. I think Lucifer was right to rebel.<br /><br />Your essay contains many ideas which have been bubbling below the surface for me. <br /><br />(I&#39;m linking this essay to other sites I hang out at. It&#39;s that good, man!) Brian Mnoreply@blogger.com